J3/06-215 To: J3 From: Bill Long Subject: C4 -- UTI 17 : generic resolution / moving TKR Date: 28-jul-2006 --------------------- Unresolved Technical Issue 17 (page 45) claims that the new definition of TKR compatbile breaks generic resolution. Also, related to TKR, Issue 14 (page 44) observed that the text on TKR compatibility belongs in c12. Reply: With the inclusion of bits compatible as part of TKR compatible, it seems that the current rules prevent an ambiguous pair of specific interfaces in a generic interface. Consider two specific subroutines, S1 and S2 that are in a generic interface S, and dummy arguments named int (type default integer), bits (type default bits), and real (type default real). Then, these two specifics: S1(bits) S2(int) would not be allowed because the arguments are not distinguishable. These two specifics: S1(bits, int) S2(int, real) would be allowed, but generic resolution would depend on the second argument only. S(X,int) will map to S1 for X bits compatible with default bits, and S(int,real) will map to S2. The term "TKR compatibile" is used only in the discussion of generic interfaces in clause 16. It is reasonable (even desirable) to move the text defining it there. Edits: ------ [45:1-4] Move the paragraph at [45:1-4] to [490:2-] following Note 16.6. [490:3] Remove "(4.3.1.3)".